C-SPAN has informed the National Catholic Register that they plan to televise the March for Life live this year. That is good news to pro-lifers because we are so used to being ignored by most (if not all) of the mainstream media. In some years it seems the only network to give the March its due is EWTN (which will also be broadcasting the March.)

It's almost funny (in the saddest way possible) that every year hundreds of thousands of people march right through the heart of Washington D.C. and each year they are promptly ignored. It's as if we're pro-life ninjas. We whisk in, nobody sees us, and we disappear.

But the amount of coverage this year will be especially telling simply because the Women's (pro-abortion) March received wall-to-wall celebratory coverage.

Now, some in the media would argue that the March for Life isn't new news because it's done every year. Well, let me tell you something, if the media covered it, it would be news to much of the country that hundreds of thousands of people traveled to D.C on what's typically one of the coldest days of the year to stand up for the protection of life. And they do this every year in an astounding testament to the belief in the sanctity of life. They marched even when they knew that there was very little chance that any advances would be made because there was a pro-abortion president or Senate and a stacked judiciary. They still marched.

I remember a few years ago after coming back from the March for Life with my kids, a neighbor asked me where we'd been. I told him we'd been down to DC for the March of Life. He had no clue what I was speaking about. None. I explained that hundreds of thousands of people march through the middle of our nation's capital every year. He said I was probably vastly overestimating the number of people because if that many people protested it would definitely have been on the news.

That's the thing, media bias isn't only about how they cover events but about what they don't cover. And when you have all the major networks uniformly ignoring something, for much of the country it just didn't happen.

It will be interesting to see if the massive exposure received by the Women's March in DC this weekend has an effect of the amount of coverage the March for Life receives. It's almost like ignoring it would be too obviously biased but I don't put it past them.

The thing is, there are many reasons why this March is so particularly newsworthy. The fact that President Trump advisor Kelly Anne Conway is speaking at the March makes it even more worthy of being acknowledged by the media. Many pro-lifers voted Donald Trump, who had been pro-abortion until recently, and are hoping and praying he keeps his campaign promises to protect life. Also, there is the fact that the Supreme Court, with a nomination from President Trump, could rule to restrict abortion in significant ways. And even more immediately, Planned Parenthood is quite possibly at risk of losing their government funding from a Republican led House and Senate. This is an important time. This is an important march.

Kudos to C-SPAN for covering the March. Let's hope the rest of the media follows suit. They should.

I had CSPAN (all uninterrupted, excellent coverage) on in one room, EWTN (who gave commentary too) on in another, AND an AOL link on my PC!!!

YES…huge KUDOS to CSPAN this year…and they even RE-broadcast it late last night!!!

It was a grand March this year…and the MSM unbelievably ignored it ONCE AGAIN it seemed!!!
Fox did talk about it. :)

Posted by Jacob on Saturday, Jan, 28, 2017 12:44 AM (EDT):

I was delighted when President Trump responded to a reporter’s comment on the women’s march with the observation that another march (this time for life) was going to be held and that he had been told that the media in the past had ignored it. Needless to say, he trumped that reporter!

Posted by cthlc12345 on Friday, Jan, 27, 2017 7:52 PM (EDT):

Exactly! Media bias is ot all about how they cover, but about what they don’t cover.
And, who exactly do the pro-choice “feminists” think they are acting as if they speak for all women? And, the “feminists” have lost all credibility with their silence on Muslim Sharia Law and men in women’s bathrooms.

Posted by a mom on Thursday, Jan, 26, 2017 8:02 PM (EDT):

I have to agree with the commenter who predicted that the only reason we will see the March for Life on tv is in order to compare the number of marchers unfavorably with the Women’s March.

Posted by justmaybe on Wednesday, Jan, 25, 2017 4:16 PM (EDT):

With all the post-inauguration debating of Trump’s, Spicer’s, Conway’s assertion of “alternative facts” re crowd-sizes, I predict most “coverage” will, this year especially, focus on comparative crowd-estimate numbers vs. the women’s march in DC and elsewhere. Conway will be at the heart of many stories and editorials.

It will be covered as a competition, like an athletic event or horse race, all about determining winners and losers and covering respective claims of victory, real or contrived. Nuance, subtlety, and ambiguity will not be covered.

To be fair, advocacy media on “both sides” will be complicit in the box-score approach and spin to “our team’s” performance and claims of “metrics that really count,” not cited by the general media.

The talking points memos are being distributed right now on all sides.

I’ll wager none of the talking points—from Planned Parenthood’s to the USCCB’s—say:

“The numbers show we clearly don’t have as much support from the American people as we’ve claimed, and it’s time to declare the other side has some great messages too. We think it’s time to end the rancor and name calling and trust our fellow Americans to make their own decisions without imposition or opposition from us. There will always be a stalemate, and trends will fluctuate. We agree with the joint statement issued today by Cecile Richards and Archbishop Chaput that urges their respective followers to get to work on controlling their own lives and to seeking unity if not uniformity on these issues.”

Posted by Elisa on Wednesday, Jan, 25, 2017 2:23 PM (EDT):

Sadly, even if you live in the metro Washington, DC area, it doesn’t get much attention in the local media outlets. WTOP Radio reports the road closures associated with the March in its live traffic reports. Other than that, it’s like it never happened.

Posted by justfeddup on Wednesday, Jan, 25, 2017 12:27 PM (EDT):

Abortion will probably never be ended. Here is a way to slow it down or at least give the person pause who is contemplating abortion. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Newton’s third law of motion. Except in this case the action is exponential. Abortion removes a buyer, a user, a producer, a taxpayer. The person who is thinking about aborting most likely has a Social Security Number. That person would lose 25% of their SS Retirement or their Welfare Check. Democrats should love that idea, more money in the coffers, to buy votes and tell the people “it’s for the children”.

Will Church leaders support and attend the March, or will they perhaps follow the Pope’s and the Vatican’s example to ignore pro-life and pro-family demonstrations? The big demonstrations of 2015 in Rome were remarkable for the absence of Catholic clergy and total silence from the Vatican and the Pope. They seem to be in league now with the globalist left and its birth control agenda.

Don’t they usually cover it, at least in part ? It seems I have seen coverage on C-Span before. Of course the March has been going on for decades and it’s possible at some time it hasn’t been covered…. Okay I just did a search for “C-Span March for Life archives” and there is some material from past years on the internet. It would be nice if Trump would address the March at least via broadcast as pro-life presidents have done in the past. I heard Kellyanne Conway was going to speak—I hope in person. She is a pro-life Catholic as well as the first woman to successfully manage a winning presidential campaign. I know EWTN usually covers the March.

Join the Discussion

We encourage a lively and honest discussion of our content. We ask that charity guide your words.
By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our discussion guidelines.
Comments are published at our discretion. We won't publish comments that lack charity, are off topic, or are more than 400 words.
Thank you for keeping this forum thoughtful and respectful.